Sir-I am indeed sorry to have aroused the ire of your correspondent, Mr. Thornton, in using the word contemporary in preference to modern, and I hope that he will believe me when I say that I had no intention of trying to appear either intellectual or pointlessly profound. I use the word conter.porary because so many people when confronted with the phrase "modern art," particularly in this case as applied to painting, immediately conjure up images of associations of extreme distortion, complete abstraction, apparently meaningless shapes and colours, and deliberate ugliness, all tied up with a firm conviction that they are being fooled which is offset by a firmer one not to be; and I wish to try not to become biased by such associations. This is not, heaven forbid, in any way to refute the wisdom of "overseas artists, critics atid directors of galleries,’ but simply for my own clarity of mind. I attach no importance whatever to which word is used, or who uses it. Contemporary art is to me like the delta of a great river, full of streams deep and shallow, now mingling, now dividing, not without its stagnant pools and backwaters; and in which, I think, one may perceive dimly a sort of direction. As for abstractionism and distortion, I will say this much: as far as I know there has been no art of any time from Paleolithic onwards which, if generally regarded by informed
opinion as good, has been photographic. There have’ been Greek statues as daringly distorted as anything thought up by Epstein or Moore, figures in Byzantine mosaics as _ deliberately stylised as the best attempts of Van Gogh or Cezanne. Mr. Thornton is right, however, when he calls me a local, and it is to his credit that he gathered as much from my letter. I find it a term which I am not ashamed of (even if it were not inevitable), for it serves to make me all the more aware of the abundant pleasures which lie in wait for such time, God willing, as I am economically able to avail myself of them. May I be permitted also to say "thank vou’ to Mr. Summers?
R.
WARD
(Auckland).
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZLIST19491216.2.12.2
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Listener, Volume 22, Issue 547, 16 December 1949, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
369Untitled New Zealand Listener, Volume 22, Issue 547, 16 December 1949, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Material in this publication is protected by copyright.
Are Media Limited has granted permission to the National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa to develop and maintain this content online. You can search, browse, print and download for research and personal study only. Permission must be obtained from Are Media Limited for any other use.
Copyright in the work University Entrance by Janet Frame (credited as J.F., 22 March 1946, page 18), is owned by the Janet Frame Literary Trust. The National Library has been granted permission to digitise this article and make it available online as part of this digitised version of the New Zealand Listener. You can search, browse, and print this article for research and personal study only. Permission must be obtained from the Janet Frame Literary Trust for any other use.
Copyright in the Denis Glover serial Hot Water Sailor published in 1959 is owned by Pia Glover. The National Library has been granted permission to digitise this serial and make it available online as part of this digitised version of the Listener. You can search, browse, and print this serial for research and personal study only. Permission must be obtained from Pia Glover for any other use.
Log in